Microsoft and Sony May Launch Next-Gen Consoles in 2012 - Rumour.

It is not a secret that Sony Computer Entertainment is developing the next-generation PlayStation 4 and there are hints that Microsoft Corp. is also working on the next-gen Xbox Loop. What is surprising is that the video game systems may hit the market as early as in 2012.

Ubisoft Montreal is working on a future title on target boxes that simulate next-gen Xbox consoles, which will succeed the Xbox 360, according to a report from Edge Online. The very first actual development kits are projected reach software designers by the end of 2011 and there signs that point to the “finalized console arriving at retail in late 2012”. Neither Microsoft nor Ubisoft commented on the “rumour and speculation”.

The same report claims that a “major Sony-owned studio has now ceased PlayStation 3 development” and has shifted its entire focus to the console’s successor, the PlayStation 4, which is in development these days. The studio is also helping to develop the next-generation graphics processing technology for the PS4, probably in terms of definition of exact specifications. While nobody outside SCE knows when exactly the PlayStation 4 hits the market, there are high chances that the system will be available no later than by holiday season in 2013. Sony also did not comment on the unofficial information.

So far only Nintendo confirmed that it would release its next-gen Wii U game console in 2012. Although the device will barely beat existing PS3 and X360 in terms of features and performance, neither Microsoft nor Sony will like a situation when they do not have leading-edge game systems. As a result, it makes sense for both to work maximally hard and release their next-gen systems in calendar 2012. The launch of the next-gen consoles will not only steal momentum from Wii U, but will establish Microsoft and Sony as indisputable game console technology leaders.

It is noteworthy that both Microsoft and Sony wanted to maintain unprecedented ten years lifecycles for Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3. Nonetheless, those cycles are unlikely to make a lot of sense with the release of the next-gen systems in 2012 – 2013 timeframes.

Discussion

It is noteworthy that both Microsoft and Sony wanted to maintain unprecedented ten years lifecycles for Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3. Nonetheless, those cycles are unlikely to make a lot of sense with the release of the next-gen systems in 2012 – 2013 timeframes.

They are quite likely to "make a lot of sense" - also (or, particularly) with the launch of next gen in 2012/2013.

All those dozens of millions of installed, very capable systems (and in one case, still among the best Bluray players; in another, recently "uprated" with Kinect) won't disappear overnight, won't be replaced very rapidly by next gen. Particularly when the dynamics change: when systems became more connected during last gen, more relying on digital downloads (of all kinds, basically finally becoming the prophecised set-top-box bringing new level of music/Last.fm/films/Netflix/"new TV"), also with ~indy titles which are bound to be produced for a few more years; when the average(!! ...that means, typically, a laptop with integrated GFX) new PC only recently approached (according to Gabe Newell of Valve, for example) the GFX/gaming power of present console generation, when the capabilities of the latter don't yet really limit what's possible in game mechanics.

Really, there's no reason (whatever the angle - unnecessarily cranking up conspicuous consumption, or: it would piss off too many owners) to almost demand simply dumping this hugely valuable, installed base (laboriously built up over several years).

It's easy to imagine the present generation systems getting 3 or so years of quite decent support, after the launch of their successors. Sony basically did just that already with PS1 and PS2 (not MS with Xbox1, but they evidently wanted to drop this a bit flawed, when it comes to market practicalities, first attempt of theirs)

And so, next-next-gen will be probably in the 20s, in the third decade of this century... crap, I'm getting old.

Preview

Preview

3.

These reports are confusing. if the Xbox loop is suppose to have Windows 9 core, but yet will debute around the same time now that Windows 8 will, then either that statement about Xbox loop having a Windows 9 base core was false or MS threw out that idea in order to push the release a year early.

Preview

Windows 9 core is only a rumor, not a factual statement, especially not one from microsoft!

For example, other rumors are completely different:

"The latest unconfirmed talk has the new console using a hex-core CPU clocked in the 3GHz range, with two GB of DDR3 RAM. The graphics will be powered by an AMD GPU that will offer both more performance and features than the current Xbox 360 GPU."http://www.fudzilla.com/g...d-be-detailed-at-ces-2012

Based on the fact that current and even 2-3 years from now ARM-based GPUs and CPUs are extremely weak, it's highly unlikely that a console will have such sub-part specifications.

I have no idea how anyone actually believes that while the Wii U will be powered by something like an HD4770 GPU, that the next Xbox will have some garbage ARM CPUs and Graphics.

Even right now, an ARM CPU is about 50% slower in integer performance than the Atom CPU. Why would MS build a next generation console around such a weak architecture? I just don't see it happening. Even Tegra 3 can barely run Unreal engine games at 1280x720 on a smartphone.

Perhaps, there will be some ARM components that allow you to use social networking/browse the internet without turning the main CPU/GPU on, but I really can't see the next Xbox or PS4 powered by some gimped smartphone components in an era of what surely will become mainstream 1080P gaming.

Preview

No-No! Actually ARM is much, much more fast than some x86 processors made by Intel!
You know Intel still produces these 8-bit x86 processors! And they even lack FPUs...

Stop with the bullshit: ARM is slow! Current ARMs are optimized to deliver longest possible battery life and not huge performance and Atoms deliver neither good performance nor good battery life. At the same TDP ARM might be even better than Atom.
Stop comparing Apples to Oranges... and BTW. None of the current consoles are using Intel processors.

I guess you are probably some Intel monkey brainwashed by Intel Inside ads.

Preview

If they release these consoles in 2012 - yeah. The parts could be 40nm or maybe even bigger.
Hopefully the don't rush to release the consoles as soon as possible. Only Nintendo needs to replace their lame Wii.

Preview

5.

Releasing a new console with the supposed specs in the next two years would be a major disappointment. Since the advent of the previous generation there isn't any major technological improvement. All they've introduced are some lame-ass laggy motion controllers. There are no major improvement in graphics, no raytracing, no near movie quality visuals... I bet they won't be able to run the "Samaritan" demo. If the next generation of consoles could not deliver better than "Samaritan" ingame graphics and some new generation of ultracool controllers - they'll suck.
And 2Gb of RAM? What they are thinking??!!!!
If they release these consoles now - we'll be stuck again with crappy graphics on the PC for another 8 years.

They better not releasing anything before they offer something truly new!

Preview

6.

If Microsoft has something new coming soon, it'll will likely be announced as a new console in 2012 and launched in late-2013. I doubt we'll see a console in 2012. Sony already made it very clear that they do not intend to go on to a PS4 any time soon--and said that even when they do, it won't be much more powerful than PS3. (Fact is, the PS3 hurt Sony's pocketbook with their initial profit loss, and though they been making a profit for 3 years now, they've still got plenty of money left to wring from the PS3.)

But at most, my personal guess is that Microsoft will come out with a slightly more powerful version of the Xbox 360 (since significantly outshining the Wii U will not be necessary, nor is the financially-exhausting gaming-console technology necessary for significantly outshining the Wii U really realistic as a goal), while Sony goes with the PS3 for about 5-6 years more (they claim 10+ years), since even God of War III didn't even use half the PS3'S total power and it cost developers a whopping $44 million to develop GoW3 even at THAT level.

But Sony and Microsoft's biggest problem will be a new coming threat to console gaming: the coming advent of cloud service HD gaming directly on SmartTVs (it's coming, people). Both Microsoft and Sony's deal won't be trying to bring out a new monster console, but just trying to stay relevant as console companies altogether. The dedicated gaming console, like the dedicated gaming handheld, are becoming endangered and will soon become questionable in their relevancy (sadly, because I love them both).

I think Nintendo's heading in the right direction with their Wii U controller (if it catches on, and I think it will, with time), its possible cloud service with Acer, and their trying to appeal to all kinds of gamers with a universal controller. Though many here may cry about its graphical capability being "late" (even though, technically, it'll outpower PS3 graphics by quite a bit), I think Nintendo realizes that in order to stay relevant with consoles, they'll have to focus of a universal control scheme, newly-emerging cloud services and better sociable online experiences than what's out there now (all of which proposed about Wii U), all more than mere graphics.

We'll be seeing PS3-ish graphics for about a decade with consoles, because we're approaching a graphics barrier with consoles--gaming console technology cost far more money to improve than gaming PCs. So I sincerely doubt we'll be seeing consoles any time soon from Microsoft OR Sony. They will likely spend 8th-gen just dabbling with slightly-advanced versions of their current consoles, taking it easy for generation 8 of consoles.

Besides, Microsoft and Sony are not really what you call "gaming" companies--they're both more like near-monopolizing companies who have many other investments in computers and electronics with only financial interest in the gaming market as a side investment, but would quickly pull out whenever it starts getting too pricey or risky. Nintendo's been a game company for 122 years, relies solely on games today, and will need games to survive like the air they breathe, so they need Wii U more than Sony and Microsoft need successors.